American Society, is crap Options

[Paradox of Life]

I'm sure several of you will disagree with me, but that's perfectly fine because after all, this is in debate. I considered putting it in the lounge, but yeah, I figured it'd might end up as a debate.

Okay, my opinion right now is that society and the human race is pathetic, stupid and overly restrained.

Since when is sex and nudity so forbidden? It's the human body! Why be ashamed? Why are people so afraid to show what everyone else has! And why is reproducing and looking at the act of reproduction suddenly sinful? No other animal has this kind of restraint. As well as kissing, making out, showing affection. Why are parents so hesitant about letting their kids do those things? Don't tell me because they're too young because then you'd be proving my point. The rules of propriety are absolutely ridiculous.

The object of life is to survive, but look what mankind did! They made technology and electricity and all these stupid devices, so now humans are so weak, they have to go to a store to get their food. They have to go to the store to buy their clothing. What a waste of time and effort to make these things! Humans are so stupid and useless, they can't farm or hunt or do things self-sufficiently because there will be a grocery store a few blocks away where they can buy everything they need with paper!

Why are humans so weak? Because they manipulated nature and took advantage of it. They made factory farming, to kill millions of animals every day for the sake of mankind. They made factories, cars, cigarettes that are slowly destroying the atmosphere. They're cutting down trees for their own convenience, while driving all the animals that live there to extinction, but it's not doing anything! It's making human kind WEAKER!

How is it making us weaker? BECAUSE WE DEPEND ON THESE CAPITAL RESOURCES. We're so weak now, that if you tossed us into a forest, we wouldn't last but for a week or two. Do that to us in the stone age, when what we focused on was survival, and we could live. But now, humans depend on what they've created and the earth is completely haywire.

Animals are much better off than we are as far as survival skills. We think we're so great and strong and mighty, but really, if you strip a man naked and toss him into the wild, he'd be dead meat in a matter of days. We're not even animals anymore. We're so strange, we think we're so special, we're a whole different species.

Please don't post on here telling me how stupid I am. That's rude and unnecessary. Thanks.

[Mulder]

i sort of agree with you.... . most of us couldn't last a week in the woods, just relying on nature. we are technically animals, whether we can think or not. we should still have some kind of connection to our environment. and i agree with you about the nudity thing...not that im gonna go be a nudist now or anything...but I don't see why nudity became an issue. we're born naked, all the animals are naked. we should be naked.

[WhiteLotus*]

Wow. I have to agree with you on the nudity part, but I also agree with you that humans are erhm..not as special as we used to be let's say 1000 years back.


... wow. You've definetly proved a point. This makes me think differently of the human race.

[ComradeRed]

Since when is sex and nudity so forbidden? It's the human body! Why be ashamed? Why are people so afraid to show what everyone else has! And why is reproducing and looking at the act of reproduction suddenly sinful? No other animal has this kind of restraint. As well as kissing, making out, showing affection. Why are parents so hesitant about letting their kids do those things? Don't tell me because they're too young because then you'd be proving my point. The rules of propriety are absolutely ridiculous.

No, but you see, when most animals have promiscuous sex, they leave their young to die off, thus maintaining the population equilibrium. In human society, we care for even the babies of strangers with welfare and stuff, so understandably, we don't want strangers having any more babies than they need to be having.

The object of life is to survive, but look what mankind did! They made technology and electricity and all these stupid devices, so now humans are so weak, they have to go to a store to get their food. They have to go to the store to buy their clothing. What a waste of time and effort to make these things! Humans are so stupid and useless, they can't farm or hunt or do things self-sufficiently because there will be a grocery store a few blocks away where they can buy everything they need with paper!

That's because the few people that do farm are so good at it that they can give food to the rest of us, and the rest of us can build things like guns, that make them strongers, and commodities, that make their lives more comfortable. So the reason most of us don't farm and hunt is because, as a species, we are too good at it--so we don't need everyone to do it.

Besides, humans have been hunting with tools forever--first with primitive sticks, where you'd need an entire village to bring down a large prey, then with bows and arrows, where you'd need a couple people, and now with high-powered rifles, where one man is enough. It's just a question of degree, not type.

Human beings are the strongest species--that's why we're killing all the other species.

Why are humans so weak? Because they manipulated nature and took advantage of it. They made factory farming, to kill millions of animals every day for the sake of mankind. They made factories, cars, cigarettes that are slowly destroying the atmosphere. They're cutting down trees for their own convenience, while driving all the animals that live there to extinction, but it's not doing anything! It's making human kind WEAKER!

The definition of being weak is being unable to defend yourself. But when you have the offensive, and other things are unable to defend themselves against you, that means that you have a superabundance of strength, not you are weak.

How is it making us weaker? BECAUSE WE DEPEND ON THESE CAPITAL RESOURCES. We're so weak now, that if you tossed us into a forest, we wouldn't last but for a week or two. Do that to us in the stone age, when what we focused on was survival, and we could live. But now, humans depend on what they've created and the earth is completely haywire.

But no one is being tossed into the forest now. We've adapted to a technological society, because society is technological. Just because a mammal couldn't survive in the climate of 500 million years ago doesn't mean anything because mammals didn't live in that period.

Animals are much better off than we are as far as survival skills. We think we're so great and strong and mighty, but really, if you strip a man naked and toss him into the wild, he'd be dead meat in a matter of days. We're not even animals anymore. We're so strange, we think we're so special, we're a whole different species.

If you shave the skin off a lion, tear its teeth out, and then toss him into the wild, he'd be dead meat in a matter of days too.

You use all the resources at your disposal. For humans, it's the division of labor.

And for the record, we are a whole different species--we can't copulate with other species to produce viable offspring.

Please don't post on here telling me how stupid I am. That's rude and unnecessary. Thanks.

Rude, perhaps, but I would question the unnecessary part.

[illumineering]

Stripping a man naked and throwing him into the wilderness is the basis of a vision quest. Many cultures still practice this rite of passage. I've done several of them.

Your generalizations are more like a self-absorbed rant.

[Paradox of Life]

^ I suppose it is a rant. But you actually took time to read it and respond. And several don't survive when tossed into the wild or at least come back injured and sick. It wouldn't be such a challenge if we were like 'animals'.

No, but you see, when most animals have promiscuous sex, they leave their young to die off, thus maintaining the population equilibrium. In human society, we care for even the babies of strangers with welfare and stuff, so understandably, we don't want strangers having any more babies than they need to be having.

This wouldn't be a problem if humans hadn't already become so weak that babies could not fend for themselves and use instinct to keep themselves alive. Humans are so complex with emotion that it's made us care for things that shouldn't even be wasted time on.

Take for example the Terry Shiavo case. It wouldn't have been such a huge debate if people could just be logical for a minute and think, this woman is braindead, sitting in the hospital all day and night, unable to think or feel happiness. Why keep her alive? And yet they did for over 15 years. Good thing they finally let her die though. But it took an awful long time.

That's because the few people that do farm are so good at it that they can give food to the rest of us, and the rest of us can build things like guns, that make them strongers, and commodities, that make their lives more comfortable. So the reason most of us don't farm and hunt is because, as a species, we are too good at it--so we don't need everyone to do it.

It sounds like a good idea to enhance and use the earth's resources to make things like guns and air condition, but it's really making humans weaker at the same time.

Let's say there's an army of soldiers, unequipped, that wants to fight against (society, nature, man) another army. By making guns and cannons and grenades, they're able to fight it off and win the battle. But let's say you take away all the guns, cannons and grenades. What then? They're useless.

Besides, humans have been hunting with tools forever--first with primitive sticks, where you'd need an entire village to bring down a large prey, then with bows and arrows, where you'd need a couple people, and now with high-powered rifles, where one man is enough. It's just a question of degree, not type.

I'm not saying guns and weapons are wrong. I'm saying by using them, the human race as an animal species is getting weaker because we depend on such things. Humans as animals adapt to their surroundings and we've not adapted for the better.

Human beings are the strongest species--that's why we're killing all the other species.
The definition of being weak is being unable to defend yourself. But when you have the offensive, and other things are unable to defend themselves against you, that means that you have a superabundance of strength, not you are weak.

You have a point because humans are the only ones that can manipulate the earth in such a way to be able to make survival for themselves. But humans aren't able to defend themselves as well as other creatures. If you're walking across the street, you could be snatched up by a kidnapper or run over by a car. Simply because, we've adapted to being in a comfortable living and not needing skills such as fast reflexes, speed, etc for anything but games and sports. And oftentimes, those skills aren't applied to anything else because you're not alert.

But no one is being tossed into the forest now. We've adapted to a technological society, because society is technological. Just because a mammal couldn't survive in the climate of 500 million years ago doesn't mean anything because mammals didn't live in that period.
If you shave the skin off a lion, tear its teeth out, and then toss him into the wild, he'd be dead meat in a matter of days too.

Society is technological. Humans depend on technology. Even the ones that didn't even contribute in creating it. And if you're going to shave a lion, tear its teeth out and toss it into the wild, you might as well skin off a human, tear its teeth out and toss it into the wild. The human would die first because there are no grocery stores and computers! Boo hoo.

You use all the resources at your disposal. For humans, it's the division of labor.

And for the record, we are a whole different species--we can't copulate with other species to produce viable offspring.
Rude, perhaps, but I would question the unnecessary part.

We're a whole different species because we're weak, we're destroying the world and taking advantage of our intelligence.

[*mipadi*]

This wouldn't be a problem if humans hadn't already become so weak that babies could not fend for themselves and use instinct to keep themselves alive. Humans are so complex with emotion that it's made us care for things that shouldn't even be wasted time on.

Well, the young of any species needs care by adults to survive, not just humans. I don't often see birds fetching their own food, or kittens going out and finding their own nourishment; they rely on their mothers for food and milk.

I'm not saying guns and weapons are wrong. I'm saying by using them, the human race as an animal species is getting weaker because we depend on such things. Humans as animals adapt to their surroundings and we've not adapted for the better.

We haven't? I'd say humans fare much better than animals in the wild. We're at a point now where humans no longer need to adapt to their environment, because we can adapt the environment to us. Whether that is a good or bad thing is certainly up for debate, but that's a different topic; the point is, we're not weaker than animals, we're stronger than animals--hence why humans have a much higher survival rate.

Your point that we wouldn't survive being tossed into the wild is moot, because humans rarely are tossed into the wild--it's not their native environment anymore. Pen a dog up in a house and leave him to himself, and see how he fares; or throw a lion into the ocean and see how long he lives. Those animals won't survive long in those environments--not because they are weak, but because that's not their native environment, and no mechanisms have evolved to let a dog eat carpet to survive, or let a lion breathe underwater.

You have a point because humans are the only ones that can manipulate the earth in such a way to be able to make survival for themselves. But humans aren't able to defend themselves as well as other creatures. If you're walking across the street, you could be snatched up by a kidnapper or run over by a car. Simply because, we've adapted to being in a comfortable living and not needing skills such as fast reflexes, speed, etc for anything but games and sports. And oftentimes, those skills aren't applied to anything else because you're not alert.

Well, that's entirely different than not surviving in the wild due to other animals; that's an example of survival of the fittest. Those who are stronger in a species will survive better than those who are weak.

Society is technological. Humans depend on technology. Even the ones that didn't even contribute in creating it. And if you're going to shave a lion, tear its teeth out and toss it into the wild, you might as well skin off a human, tear its teeth out and toss it into the wild. The human would die first because there are no grocery stores and computers! Boo hoo.

Again, that's because "the wild" is not our native environment, and we have not adapted to such an environment (nor have we adapted "the wild" to suit us). Any animal thrown into an environment to which it is not adapted has a minimal chance of survival.

We're a whole different species because we're weak, we're destroying the world and taking advantage of our intelligence.

Whether our adaptations to the environment is an improvement in all respects is certainly debateable, but as noted above, I'd hardly say we're weak, as long as we exist in the environment for which we are designed. But that goes for any animal, or even plants and other lifeforms.

[*disco infiltrator*]

So we are technological. If we weren't, we would depend on the wild and not our technological advances. It works both ways. We are using our resources and our biggest resource is our mind. Using our mind to make things that help us is depending on survival. If you're so against grocery stores, why don't you go hunt with sticks and see how well you do?

[ComradeRed]

This wouldn't be a problem if humans hadn't already become so weak that babies could not fend for themselves and use instinct to keep themselves alive. Humans are so complex with emotion that it's made us care for things that shouldn't even be wasted time on.

No, emotion exists to bond people so that they have more of an incentive to make babies and protect their babies.

A human baby isn't going to have the physical strength to survive; we are a species that looks after our young. That's our survival strategy and it's just as valid as any other.

Take for example the Terry Shiavo case. It wouldn't have been such a huge debate if people could just be logical for a minute and think, this woman is braindead, sitting in the hospital all day and night, unable to think or feel happiness. Why keep her alive? And yet they did for over 15 years. Good thing they finally let her die though. But it took an awful long time.
It sounds like a good idea to enhance and use the earth's resources to make things like guns and air condition, but it's really making humans weaker at the same time.

Guns let us hunt more efficienty. Air conditioning lets us not die of heatstroke in hot environments (otherwise, we wouldn't be able to settle parts of the world).

Let's say there's an army of soldiers, unequipped, that wants to fight against (society, nature, man) another army. By making guns and cannons and grenades, they're able to fight it off and win the battle. But let's say you take away all the guns, cannons and grenades. What then? They're useless.

But that doesn't matter, because they know how to make the guns, cannons, and grenades.

I'm not saying guns and weapons are wrong. I'm saying by using them, the human race as an animal species is getting weaker because we depend on such things. Humans as animals adapt to their surroundings and we've not adapted for the better.

No, the human race without weapons is weaker; but we have weapons so it doesn't matter. A tiger would be weaker if you cut off its arms, but it has arms, so it doesn't matter.

You have a point because humans are the only ones that can manipulate the earth in such a way to be able to make survival for themselves.

No, all animals do this. That's what survival is.

But humans aren't able to defend themselves as well as other creatures. If you're walking across the street, you could be snatched up by a kidnapper or run over by a car. Simply because, we've adapted to being in a comfortable living and not needing skills such as fast reflexes, speed, etc for anything but games and sports. And oftentimes, those skills aren't applied to anything else because you're not alert.

If you've ever driven on the Pennsylvania Turnpike, you will realize that there is a lot more dead animal roadkill than people who have been hit by a car.

It takes a lot of quick reflexes to drive safely.

Society is technological. Humans depend on technology. Even the ones that didn't even contribute in creating it. And if you're going to shave a lion, tear its teeth out and toss it into the wild, you might as well skin off a human, tear its teeth out and toss it into the wild. The human would die first because there are no grocery stores and computers! Boo hoo.

Not everyone needs to be creating technology, because the people that do do it are so good at it. You don't understand specialization.

We're a whole different species because we're weak, we're destroying the world and taking advantage of our intelligence.

Intelligence is an asset, just like physical strength.

[Paradox of Life]

So we are technological. If we weren't, we would depend on the wild and not our technological advances. It works both ways. We are using our resources and our biggest resource is our mind. Using our mind to make things that help us is depending on survival. If you're so against grocery stores, why don't you go hunt with sticks and see how well you do?

Exactly. Humans have adapted so well to this technological envirement that we'd have trouble with things we could do ages ago. But there's nothing we can do about that. Whatever, it's still a good topic of debate.

We have our own way of life. It's efficient in it's own way, but if it all were to disappear one day, I promise you, a majority of the human race would be wiped out. Because we can't live with raw nature, raw survival like all other animals. I'm only saying under that circumstance that we're weak. We're the most high-maitenance of all species, am I correct?

[*RiC3xBoy*]

Because we can't live with raw nature, raw survival like all other animals. I'm only saying under that circumstance that we're weak. We're the most high-maitenance of all species, am I correct?

How can we not? We evolved from monkeys(who seem to be living pretty well in nature). Unless evolution goes backwards, humans will pretty much be alrite. Also, High-maitenance is one way to put it, I'd prefer to call it high-intelect.

[Paradox of Life]

^ Did you read my whole first post?

You try doing that. We have adapted to the technological, easy life (getting food from the grocery store, air condition). We did evolve from primitive cavemen that could survive in the wild, but we created technology and became dependent on it. Therefore, we're weaker than monkeys as well.

[*RiC3xBoy*]

So basically, the smarter we get, the weaker we are?? Because people now can make things easier for their lives and others would make them stupid?? Or being able to visit places across the world in less than 80 days would make us obsolete compared to animals?

[aera]

^i think she means the other people that do nothing and just use the things smarter people make to make their lives easier. those are the kinds of people that are making humans weaker.

^ Did you read my whole first post?
You try doing that. We have adapted to the technological, easy life (getting food from the grocery store, air condition). We did evolve from primitive cavemen that could survive in the wild, but we created technology and became dependent on it. Therefore, we're weaker than monkeys as well.

that's only some people. majority of humans can live without most technology. for example, the homeless. they've learned to find food, water, and shelter. and the people in Africa. they can get food for themselves and food from the wild.

[Aesirus]

^ Did you read my whole first post?

You try doing that. We have adapted to the technological, easy life (getting food from the grocery store, air condition). We did evolve from primitive cavemen that could survive in the wild, but we created technology and became dependent on it. Therefore, we're weaker than monkeys as well.

No, we WOULD be weaker than monkeys if theoretically all our technology disappeared. But it hasn't; and therefore we aren't. You're confusing worst case scenarios with reality.

[aera]

^she's comparing us to how we were before. and it will happen soon. we're running out of resources.

[SkaironFrenzy]

I'm sure several of you will disagree with me, but that's perfectly fine because after all, this is in debate. I considered putting it in the lounge, but yeah, I figured it'd might end up as a debate.

Okay, my opinion right now is that society and the human race is pathetic, stupid and overly restrained.

Since when is sex and nudity so forbidden? It's the human body! Why be ashamed? Why are people so afraid to show what everyone else has! And why is reproducing and looking at the act of reproduction suddenly sinful? No other animal has this kind of restraint. As well as kissing, making out, showing affection. Why are parents so hesitant about letting their kids do those things? Don't tell me because they're too young because then you'd be proving my point. The rules of propriety are absolutely ridiculous.

I agree on the most part except this one ^.

" And why is reproducing and looking at the act of reproduction suddenly sinful?"
Well the thought of STDs and pregnancy before marriage are what makes the idea of SEX a sinful act... Well no. Sex isnt sinful. Just the concept of sex BEFORE marriage is sinful. Plus it wasnt sunddenly sinful, it was part of many cultures way back when. Prostitutes, adulters, etc. where looked down upon. so yea. get my point?

"Why be ashamed? "

Well the people are ashamed for numerous reasons. Could be because "its" smaller than the other guys. Or "it" is mutated. I dont know, but wouldnt you be kinda ahsamed if people started criticizing your reproduction system? Yea some people can say, " I dont care." but some people are sensitive.




-Just my opinion...

[*RiC3xBoy*]

Also to note, what your topic is saying is basically putting human society into an extreme environment. In other words, you might as well take a gorilla and stick in the north pole and see how long it lasts.

[Shahin]

Since when is sex and nudity so forbidden? It's the human body!

Sex isn't forbidden, but isn't it reasonable to not be grinding with your girl/man in front of everyone? Nudity? Don't make me laugh. Since the beginning of time, man has covered his body with anything available, not because it was shameful, to keep warm. Throughout the ages, mankind has grown accustomed to clothing, and that's why we wear them consistently nowadays. Warmth is the root cause.

The object of life is to survive, but look what mankind did! They made technology and electricity and all these stupid devices, so now humans are so weak, they have to go to a store to get their food. They have to go to the store to buy their clothing. What a waste of time and effort to make these things! Humans are so stupid and useless, they can't farm or hunt or do things self-sufficiently because there will be a grocery store a few blocks away where they can buy everything they need with paper!

Technology is not something to be made, it is something to be advanced. If you think electricity is a stupid invention then get off your damned computer, and quit paying your bills. This isn't JUST American Society either you know? This happens ALL over the world. In other industrialized nations and in developing countries, the same exact thing. Since before the time of Christ there were vendors that sold food and clothing, so don't bitch about modern society's supposed flaws.

Why are humans so weak? Because they manipulated nature and took advantage of it. They made factory farming, to kill millions of animals every day for the sake of mankind. They made factories, cars, cigarettes that are slowly destroying the atmosphere. They're cutting down trees for their own convenience, while driving all the animals that live there to extinction, but it's not doing anything! It's making human kind WEAKER!

Humans are the opposite of weak, buddy. Of course we are going to manipulate nature to better suit our needs. Every animal on the face of the earth does. Birds take sticks to make a nest. Same principal, we use our surroundings to better suit our needs. We take advantage of our resources to advance our society. Would you rather we live in an aimless society with no goals other than stay at the same state of being that it exists in at the present? No, you wouldn't you damned caveman.

This wouldn't be a problem if humans hadn't already become so weak that babies could not fend for themselves and use instinct to keep themselves alive.

I can't even believe you would say anything like that. Serious and profound shock. I won't even extend my views on that idiotic statement.

The point is, is that humans WERE hunter-gatherers, buddy. At the same time we were inventors. Since our creation we have been striving to better advance the technology put at our disposal. And we will keep striving to advance, no matter how un-logically disgusting you think the thought is.

[*kryogenix*]

Just one question before we start, what makes you think these things are exclusive to American Society?

I'm sure several of you will disagree with me, but that's perfectly fine because after all, this is in debate. I considered putting it in the lounge, but yeah, I figured it'd might end up as a debate.

Okay, my opinion right now is that society and the human race is pathetic, stupid and overly restrained.

Pathetic? We're only the dominant species on this planet. Stupid? You're typing this from a computer and you're calling us stupid? And you're only as restrained as you want to be. You're living in society governed by laws. If you don't like the laws, find a way to change them, or leave the society.

Since when is sex and nudity so forbidden? It's the human body! Why be ashamed? Why are people so afraid to show what everyone else has! And why is reproducing and looking at the act of reproduction suddenly sinful? No other animal has this kind of restraint. As well as kissing, making out, showing affection. Why are parents so hesitant about letting their kids do those things? Don't tell me because they're too young because then you'd be proving my point. The rules of propriety are absolutely ridiculous.

I don't disagree with intercourse as a sign of love between two people in an attempt to bring about new life. I think the problem is with lust. Lust != Love. With lust, the parents are just thinking of their own short term desires, rather than the consequences and long term commitment. A child born from lust has a harder time being loved than a child born from a loving relationship. If we weren't so restrained and everyone was having sex, our population would have ballooned, and either a lot of people would be dead, or all of our living conditions would drop. As for parental objection to kissing and making out, I give them the benefit of the doubt. We all know how sometimes "one thing leads to another" and parents just want to avoid that.

The object of life is to survive, but look what mankind did! They made technology and electricity and all these stupid devices, so now humans are so weak, they have to go to a store to get their food. They have to go to the store to buy their clothing. What a waste of time and effort to make these things! Humans are so stupid and useless, they can't farm or hunt or do things self-sufficiently because there will be a grocery store a few blocks away where they can buy everything they need with paper!

We're just fine. Animals have special tools for certain tasks, like wings and sharp teeth. Instead of these things, we got a bigger brain. Technology is the fruit of this bigger brain. I think it's a great thing. The world can support a larger population because there is more food readily available than a hunter-gatherer society would have. And I don't think there was a time when humans were immensely strong/had physical tools that helped them survive better. Maybe we got a little bit weaker, but we know how technology that multiplies our strength a hundred fold.

Why are humans so weak? Because they manipulated nature and took advantage of it. They made factory farming, to kill millions of animals every day for the sake of mankind. They made factories, cars, cigarettes that are slowly destroying the atmosphere. They're cutting down trees for their own convenience, while driving all the animals that live there to extinction, but it's not doing anything! It's making human kind WEAKER!

We're pretty much the dominant species here on earth. If the trees and animals want to complain, they'd have done so by now. Farms are necessary for the survival of the human race. We need readily available food in order to feed the people.

Humankind realizes that someday, our resources might run out. That's why we're looking for renewable and cleaner sources of energy. If anything, this is a sign of us getting stronger, not weaker.

How is it making us weaker? BECAUSE WE DEPEND ON THESE CAPITAL RESOURCES. We're so weak now, that if you tossed us into a forest, we wouldn't last but for a week or two. Do that to us in the stone age, when what we focused on was survival, and we could live. But now, humans depend on what they've created and the earth is completely haywire.

You're definitely not giving us enough credit here. Didn't the first colonists do exactly that? A bunch of people set up a village in a forest. Look where we are now.

Again, our lifestyle now is a sign of progression, not regression of the human ability to survive.

Animals are much better off than we are as far as survival skills. We think we're so great and strong and mighty, but really, if you strip a man naked and toss him into the wild, he'd be dead meat in a matter of days. We're not even animals anymore. We're so strange, we think we're so special, we're a whole different species.

If you stripped a man naked, and tossed him into the forest, he'd probably die. However, if you removed a fish's gills and tossed it on land, it would die too. If you removed a bird's wings and tossed it in the desert, it would probably die.

The reason why all of these would die is because you're stripping them of the specialized things they use to survive, and placing him in a foreign habitat. Our feature is our intelligence and the ability to use tools. Humans have adapted to live in comfortable houses. It's better that way.

However, I can't help but think the original poster is hypocritical. If you were against this, wouldn't you take off your clothes and run to the woods right now? You're asking the human race to reform, but you refuse to do so yourself. Practice what you preach.

[Paradox of Life]

Just one question before we start, what makes you think these things are exclusive to American Society?

Because they have the most restrained laws. I don't think in Europe or other places the laws about nudity, etc are so strictly enforced. And in Belgium and possibly other countries they are allowed to smoke, drink at any age or even smoke marijuana at 18. It's FREEDOM OF CHOICE. America claims to have all this freedom and independence, but it's just thousands of people on a piece of land with overly restrictive laws and government.

Pathetic? We're only the dominant species on this planet. Stupid? You're typing this from a computer and you're calling us stupid? And you're only as restrained as you want to be. You're living in society governed by laws. If you don't like the laws, find a way to change them, or leave the society.

The object of life is to survive and we were doing just fine as primitive human beings. If we could survive in the heat and cold for a few years, we as ANIMALS would adapt to the environment and wouldn't be so weak as we are now. We choose to make the environment a different place, a more comfortable place for us because our strong, complex emotions demand for such things. We won't die if faced with heat or cold. We'll eventually adapt.

I don't disagree with intercourse as a sign of love between two people in an attempt to bring about new life. I think the problem is with lust. Lust != Love. With lust, the parents are just thinking of their own short term desires, rather than the consequences and long term commitment. A child born from lust has a harder time being loved than a child born from a loving relationship. If we weren't so restrained and everyone was having sex, our population would have ballooned, and either a lot of people would be dead, or all of our living conditions would drop. As for parental objection to kissing and making out, I give them the benefit of the doubt. We all know how sometimes "one thing leads to another" and parents just want to avoid that.

Okay, you made a really good point here and I have trouble saying something in return. And this is the negative effect of emotion because emotion creates lust, lust creates the desire for sex, the desire for sex and sex itself will cause inevitable reproduction. But keep in mind, not EVERYONE is looking for people to have sex with. A lot of people aren't interested at all. If people took no caution about sex, I'm sure the earth's living conditions and population would not have such dramatic changes as you said. And people can have sex without going through intercourse. But yeah.. It's hard not to. So I'll mostly agree with you on this factor.

We're just fine. Animals have special tools for certain tasks, like wings and sharp teeth. Instead of these things, we got a bigger brain. Technology is the fruit of this bigger brain. I think it's a great thing. The world can support a larger population because there is more food readily available than a hunter-gatherer society would have. And I don't think there was a time when humans were immensely strong/had physical tools that helped them survive better. Maybe we got a little bit weaker, but we know how technology that multiplies our strength a hundred fold.

Again, our lifestyle now is a sign of progression, not regression of the human ability to survive.
If you stripped a man naked, and tossed him into the forest, he'd probably die. However, if you removed a fish's gills and tossed it on land, it would die too. If you removed a bird's wings and tossed it in the desert, it would probably die.

There you go! Like I said, we depend on technology like a fish depends on it's gills. But technology is not part of our body or adaptations. Someone who has no idea about how to work an electric device can still use it and depend on it to live. Therefore.. it really takes no mental or physical ability to be able to survive.

We're pretty much the dominant species here on earth. If the trees and animals want to complain, they'd have done so by now. Farms are necessary for the survival of the human race. We need readily available food in order to feed the people.

Humankind realizes that someday, our resources might run out. That's why we're looking for renewable and cleaner sources of energy. If anything, this is a sign of us getting stronger, not weaker.
You're definitely not giving us enough credit here. Didn't the first colonists do exactly that? A bunch of people set up a village in a forest. Look where we are now.

Yeah, we're stronger. Thanks to technology. There are several ways to survive, which is obviously the objective of life. We decided to make it an easy, comfortable, at times almost an effortless life. Take away all our modern conveniences and we'd die.

However, I can't help but think the original poster is hypocritical. If you were against this, wouldn't you take off your clothes and run to the woods right now? You're asking the human race to reform, but you refuse to do so yourself. Practice what you preach.

Jesus. How many times do I have to repeat this? We were brought up as weaklings and so I can't practice what I preach solely because I was raised in a comfortable living and etc. Humans NO LONGER have adaptations to survive in such conditions. Okay, sometimes I am a hypocrite, but not in this situation. I'm not saying everyone is weak excluding myself. I AM WEAK, BUT I REALIZE IT.

[ComradeRed]

Because they have the most restrained laws. I don't think in Europe or other places the laws about nudity, etc are so strictly enforced. And in Belgium and possibly other countries they are allowed to smoke, drink at any age or even smoke marijuana at 18. It's FREEDOM OF CHOICE. America claims to have all this freedom and independence, but it's just thousands of people on a piece of land with overly restrictive laws and government.

Um no. In Germany, a man was arrested for teaching his dog to do a Nazi salute. A lot of freedom of choice there, huh? In England, they are currently debating a law that would allow the government to revoke your citizenship AND throw you in jail for publishing anything supportive of or justifying "terrorism" (i.e. someone could be jailed for writing that terrorists are just fighting to rid our influence from their lands). A lot of free choice there.

The object of life is to survive and we were doing just fine as primitive human beings. If we could survive in the heat and cold for a few years, we as ANIMALS would adapt to the environment and wouldn't be so weak as we are now. We choose to make the environment a different place, a more comfortable place for us because our strong, complex emotions demand for such things. We won't die if faced with heat or cold. We'll eventually adapt.

No, we died off by the millions to smallpox plagues and had a life expectancy of 30.

[Shahin]

Damn, argue with my comments too woman!

[*RiC3xBoy*]

Yeah, we're stronger. Thanks to technology. There are several ways to survive, which is obviously the objective of life. We decided to make it an easy, comfortable, at times almost an effortless life. Take away all our modern conveniences and we'd die.

Uhhh...taking that away is the same as taking out intelect. In other words, thats the same as taking away an animals claws, sharp teeth, or hyper sensitive nose. I highly doubt a cheetah would be able to survive without its teeth and claws.

[Paradox of Life]

Damn, argue with my comments too woman!

Damn, it's hard to keep up with so many! And anyway, I just made this topic for the same reason Justin made the George W. Bush is Dead topic. Because I had nothing else to do.

Okay people, humans are so strong and mighty. You got that right. They took advantage of their intelligence, created factory farming and killed thousands of animals every day for their own convenience. I could continue my rant on this, but it would be a completely different story.

Humans are so strong and mighty, they're creating air pollution and thinning the ozone layer with cars, smoking, factories, and other technological items. Again, I could continue my rant on this, but it would be a completely different story.

And finally, humans are so strong and mighty, they're debating whether or not a woman should be allowed to abort her baby. Can the laws please back off? The woman should have a right to do as she wishes with her body! Any other animals would be able to do as they may, but humans have to have laws preventing women from doing what they want to their own bodies. And you know the last sentence.